Direct Buried cables within a controlled area and what constitutes mechanical protection

Sadly I disagree with some of the above sentiments regarding scope. Leaving the not irrelevant question of contract (which BOD is right to question) to one side for a momeent...

This is not an installation that comes under BS7671 is it?

Au contraire: See the list of scope-inclusive items of BS7671 110.1.1, particularly (xviii), which is pretty unambiguous, and in that light I would suggest that the onus is on others to say how it is excluded by the list of 110.2.

 

IET code of practice for grid connected solar PV systems 2015 section 8.2.  states in blue mandatory text General BS7671 requirements are for AC only

This is well and truly out of context. Section 8.2 is titled "AC system requirements: Low Voltage" so "The A.C. circuit [...] shall be designed and installed so as to comply with the requirements of BS 7671" doesn't have any bearing on DC. There are many references to BS7671 for the DC design.

 

BS EN 62446 covers the PV DC side

Yes it does, for inspection, testing and maintenance, not design. However the same does require verification to IEC 60364, the national implementation of which is BS 7671 (though some other national version could conceivably be used if allowed in the contract). Depending on the vintage of the installation, (BS) IEC 62548 may also have applied to the design.

 

“generator”  means  a  person  who  generates  electricity  at  high  voltage  for  the  purpose  ofsupplying consumer’s installations via a network

... But PV installations generate at low voltage (<=1500Vdc). They connect at HV. If you don't accept that, I don't see what there is to differentiate between that and a factory supplied at 11kV with a 20kW system on the office roof; after all from the DNO's perspective they're both now SSEGs (or PGMs in the new G99 lingo). So I would argue that they're not generators for the purposes of ESQCR. Indeed I would suggest that classing them as generators creates more problems than it solves (random example do any solar parks take any precautions to ensure continuity of the HV supply neutral?). They may however be persons operating a source of energy in parallel with a distributor's network, which sounds the same, but isn't by definition. Odd as it sounds absent further guidance (which to be fair I would welcome) I would go out on a limb and suggest the best classification in terms of ESQCR is that of consumer. (So no TN-C for you!)



The above all considered, I would return to BOD's very pertinent question and add that in all the design projects I have seen for solar parks, the client has specified BS7671 in the contract specification and often the Connection Agreement with the DNO often stipulates the same.

Sadly I disagree with some of the above sentiments regarding scope. Leaving the not irrelevant question of contract (which BOD is right to question) to one side for a momeent...

This is not an installation that comes under BS7671 is it?

Au contraire: See the list of scope-inclusive items of BS7671 110.1.1, particularly (xviii), which is pretty unambiguous, and in that light I would suggest that the onus is on others to say how it is excluded by the list of 110.2.

 

IET code of practice for grid connected solar PV systems 2015 section 8.2.  states in blue mandatory text General BS7671 requirements are for AC only

This is well and truly out of context. Section 8.2 is titled "AC system requirements: Low Voltage" so "The A.C. circuit [...] shall be designed and installed so as to comply with the requirements of BS 7671" doesn't have any bearing on DC. There are many references to BS7671 for the DC design.

 

BS EN 62446 covers the PV DC side

Yes it does, for inspection, testing and maintenance, not design. However the same does require verification to IEC 60364, the national implementation of which is BS 7671 (though some other national version could conceivably be used if allowed in the contract). Depending on the vintage of the installation, (BS) IEC 62548 may also have applied to the design.

 

“generator”  means  a  person  who  generates  electricity  at  high  voltage  for  the  purpose  ofsupplying consumer’s installations via a network

... But PV installations generate at low voltage (<=1500Vdc). They connect at HV. If you don't accept that, I don't see what there is to differentiate between that and a factory supplied at 11kV with a 20kW system on the office roof; after all from the DNO's perspective they're both now SSEGs (or PGMs in the new G99 lingo). So I would argue that they're not generators for the purposes of ESQCR. Indeed I would suggest that classing them as generators creates more problems than it solves (random example do any solar parks take any precautions to ensure continuity of the HV supply neutral?). They may however be persons operating a source of energy in parallel with a distributor's network, which sounds the same, but isn't by definition. Odd as it sounds absent further guidance (which to be fair I would welcome) I would go out on a limb and suggest the best classification in terms of ESQCR is that of consumer. (So no TN-C for you!)



The above all considered, I would return to BOD's very pertinent question and add that in all the design projects I have seen for solar parks, the client has specified BS7671 in the contract specification and often the Connection Agreement with the DNO often stipulates the same.